Volume 1 Transcript of First Day of Jury Trial When Heard Before the Honorable Senior United States District Court Judge Maurice M
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT J FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA , GAINESVILLE DIVISION THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Docket No. 94CR1009MMP Plaintiff, Gainesville, Florida May 2, 2000 JOHN KNOCK and ALBERT MADRID, Defendants. VOLUME 1 TRANSCRIPT OF FIRST DAY OF JURY TRIAL WHEN HEARD BEFORE THE HONORABLE SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MAURICE M. PAUL, AND A JURY. ?or the Government-: JAMES C. HANKINSON, ESQUIRE Assistant United States Attorney 111 North Adams Street Fourth Floor \- Tallahassee, Florida 32301 -AND- ROBERT DAVIES, ESQUIRE Assistant United States Attorney 104 North Main Street Fourth Floor Gainesville, Florida 32601 ?or Defendant Knock: MICHAEL KENNEDY, ESQUIRE ROBERT RIONDA, ESQUIRE 425 Park Avenue Suite 2600 New York, New York 10022 qPPEARANCES: (Continued . ) For Defendant Madrid: RANDOLPH E. DM,ESQUIRE Pier 5 Law Offices Pier 5 North, The Embardadero San Francisco, CA 94111 Zourt Reporter : Mark N. ~tuart,RPR -CPE Official Court Reporter Post Office Box 1328 Gainesville, Florida 32602-1328 352-380-0399 THE COURT: Good morning everyone. Be seated. All right. First of all, do you all have a witness list? MR. KENNEDY: Your Honor, we -- there are only three additions to the government's intended witness list. May I give you those names this morning? I apologize, but I didn't get the Government% list until last night. I can tell you that there are three -- there is a Customs agent named Paul Beauliey, B-E-A-U-L-I-E-Y. There is a DEA agent who is also the case agent, whom we have all met, that is Michael Lee. And the last one is Claude Duboc. Other than that, Your Honor, we -- the government has encompassed the witnesses that we intend to call. MR. DAAR: On behalf of Mr. Madrid, I don't have any witnesses at this time. THE COURT: Who is going to be your case agent? MR. HANKINSON: That was a matter we need to resolve. 1 have c3,iscgssecJ, with the defense -- .a7-WG a~c--- yu~~iy--:-- tu L~ZYU~;=~L-,----A-L the Court to let us have two, Mike Lee and Carl Lilley. The defense has indicated they needed a chance to talk with their clients. I don't know whether they've had that opportunity yet to see whether they oppose that. If they are going to oppose that, 1/11make that in the form of a motion. But with -- with the two prosecutors working on a month-long trial, it makes it very unworkable if we can't both be working at the same time. MR. KENITEDY: Would you like to hear -- if I may. I think the -- they've got to exclude Mike Lee, who he is going to be a witness for the -- on behalf of the defense. Carl Lilley has been the case agent all along. As I understand matters, Agent Lee comes on later and does some historical retrieval of documents. But the real case agent that -- the hands-on case agent throughout this has been Carl Lilley. And in my judgment, Mr. Lilley's presence is enough for -- case agent wise. MR. HANKINSON: Do you want me to file a written motion to that effect, Your Honor, or do you want to hear -- THE COURT: Whatever response. MR. KANKINSON: Yes, sir, Your Honor. You know, as the Court knows, we are anticipating a month-long trial. Mr. Davies and I are working, you know, most of the time. We have a lot of witnesses who are from out of town. They are TTQTTT A; FG; fl.t?lt t?71r hr\ q~nt<1 &t\hzz L---- "-&I UILL-Lbu-LL tOL~AA LV ULLLLL LIICY YCL ile~t: tow11. 50 basically our pretrials are being done in the evening. Obviously, if there is only one case agent, Mr. Davies and I can't be working at the same time. Mike Lee is -- will probably be a witness, but it's going to be as to matters very technical in nature, identification of a lineup, the custodian of evidence, perhaps the summary of some of the The only thing that he has firsthand knowledge of, and it's very limited, is he was in France when Mr. Knock was arrested, saw some of the items after the arrest, but was not allowed to participate in the arrest in any way. So I mean his -- his involvement as a,witness is -- although it may be that we would call him a number of times, it is very limited, almost no firsthand information. In terms. of Mr. Lilley, you know what he has to say is, by and large, of record from the Grenhagen case already. So I don't see any prejudice to the defense of this nature. THE COURT: Any further argument? MR. KENNEDY: Submit it. MR. DAAR: Submit it. THE COURT: All right. Let's talk about some other matters then. The government has filed a motion concerning the admission of two statements. And are you all prepared to argue those? MIL I(E3?NEDY: I'm not, YOUT Honor. ,T ,,,A; A ..,,n~t ,,,,iV,-vnfi~-t~~a that until last night. I'm having it researched. I've -- I would imagine that is not a matter that they are going to be proving the first week anyway. If I'm wrong about that, Mr. Hankinson -- MR. HANKINSON: I think an orderly way to proceed on that, Your Honor, would be we would proffer those witnesses when we reach that point. THE COURT: Then you won't make any reference to them in your opening? MR. HANKINSON: The only thing I do anticipate making reference to, but it would be proven in some other way, at least circumstantially, is the alias Patrick Osborne which is part of the indictment. But other than -- you know, other than that, we would not be referring to the lineup and the bank records that Mr. Davies is going to be offering from Singapore. There will be no reason to offer -- to mention those in the opening statement. THE COURT: All right. As long as you don't open it, we'll take it up later. MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Your Honor. MR. DAAR: Your Honor, I had a request. I have a paralegal with me who is a law school graduate. He helped me prepare the case. He is familiar with all of the documents. I would like him to have access to me during the trial. I'm not sure how you configure your courtroom, and sometimes he's -- these kind of cases, there's a little table or area behind counsel table. If there is such a thing available, I would ask for access to that. We've got about seven boxes, so he is kind of helping me find papers and so forth. THE COURT: Is that table still out there, Mr. Hankinson, from that last trial that the defense used to ?ut over by the wall? They lined up must have put 20 file Doxes up there. MR. Dm: He has seventeen. I have seven. THE COURT: We'll work out something for you all. MR. KENNEDY: And if I may, Your Honor. There is a Sainesville resident who -- his name is Jim Cravens, 2-R-E-A-V-E-N-S.He has done some investigative work for me 2nd some research down here. I would like him accessible. He uill only be present during the voir dire, and then probably mly during limited portions of the trial. The other person who will be joining me from time to time is my law associate from New York, who has moved for admission pro hac vice to whom 1'11 introduce him to the Court when he arrives tomorrow. He will be in and out, but assisting me in that regard. MR. HANKINSON: Do you anticipate Mr. Craven being a potential witness? MR. KENNEDY: No, sir. Absolutely not. Mr. Cravens will not be a witness. THE COURT: Okay. What else then, folks, before we -- MR. HANKINSON: Judge, we are going to be setting up our computer equipment. We've had to use it downstairs, and I'm assuming between when we pick the jury and when we start into opening statements, there will be some break there. And we will be -- we'll need a few minutes to get our stuff moved up and set up, you know, or -- I'm sure before we get into opening, we are going to have a lunch break at some point in time . THE COURT: We can accommodate that. It will probably take us a couple of hours to get a jury. MR. KENNEDY: Judge, under the extradition order the French imposed two conditions, Your Honor. One is that he not be charged with anything connected to money laundering prior to January of 1988. And the second provision was that he not be charged with anything drug connected prior to January of 1986. The reason the French did that, as I understand it, was because those were the French statutes of limitations, not necessarily the American statutes of limitations applicable to those crimes, and therefore they imposed that as a condition of him coming. We would assert that condition on behalf of Mr. Knock. And, if there is a problem with that, at this point I simply would ask that the government in their opening to not mention anything prior to those dates -- I don't think it's real critical to their case anyway -- so that we can properly brief the Court on it.